The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to consider whether Arizona can mandate a proof of citizenship requirement for those registering to vote, a decision that could carry significant implications for voting laws nationwide.
The high court accepted an appeal from the Republican National Committee to review a lower court decision that found provisions of the state’s 2022 voting law, which would require people to show proof of citizenship to register to vote, violated the federal National Voter Registration Act of 1993.
It will also decide whether Arizona can purge voter rolls within 90 days of an election, a rule that voting rights groups decried as a violation of the NVRA’s “quiet period” prohibition that broadly prevents states from “systematically” removing voters from the rolls right before elections.
The court is expected to hear arguments on the case in its next term, which begins in October.
And any ruling could have major implications ahead of the 2028 presidential elections. Citizenship checks, voter ID requirements and states’ voter rolls have become major focuses of President Donald Trump and Republicans’ efforts to tighten voting laws across the country.
In 2022, the GOP-controlled Arizona legislature passed both measures as part of its push to crack down on voting rules after the 2020 election.
Mi Familia Vota, a Democratic-aligned and Latino-focused voting group, sued over the laws, and the 9th Circuit agreed that the laws violated NVRA and created a burden for voters when it invalidated parts of the rules.
In its petition to the court, the RNC argued that the case presented an opportunity for the justices to resolve the issues “without an election hanging in the balance.”
When the RNC appealed the case to the Supreme Court, Mi Familia Vota president and CEO Hector Sanchez Barba argued that the case “is not about election security.”
“It is about political power, who gets to participate in our democracy, and who Republicans are trying to push out of it,” Sanchez Barba said in a statement.
The RNC has filed lawsuit after lawsuit ahead of the midterms related to voting laws, as it makes election integrity one of its top focuses.
In a statement, RNC chair Joe Gruters said, “Democrats sued to block Arizona's proof of citizenship law and stop the state from removing noncitizens from its voter rolls."
"The RNC is proud to lead this effort, and we will keep fighting nationwide to defend election integrity and ensure only eligible citizens cast a ballot,” Gruters said.
Mi Familia Vota did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that Arizona could not require people to provide documentation proving citizenship when registering to vote in federal elections. The NVRA requires people to attest that they are U.S. citizens on federal voter registration forms, but does not require documents to prove citizenship, and courts have found that states cannot add further requirements to register to vote for those using federal forms.
Some states have passed their own laws requiring documentary proof of citizenship in some form, although many attempts have faced court challenges. Arizona has retained a relatively unique system, in which some voters who do not provide proof of citizenship are only allowed to vote in federal elections but not state elections.
The justices’ Monday decision to hear the case revives the case at a time when state voting laws have come under heightened scrutiny by Trump and Republicans.
Trump has repeatedly pressed Republicans on Capitol Hill to pass the SAVE America Act — a GOP election bill that would overhaul federal voting rules, including requiring voters to show proof of citizenship to register. The legislation has been stalled in Congress amid some Republican holdouts — and staunch Democratic opposition — even as Trump has sought to hold up other pieces of legislation until it passes.
The Justice Department has also zeroed in on states’ voter rolls as part of what critics say is a broader effort by the administration to insert itself into state election administration. The department has requested election records from virtually every state, a demand that 30 states and Washington, D.C., have rejected, prompting the administration to file suit.
Trump has also sought to crack down on mail-in voting ahead of November’s midterms, but he suffered a major loss from the Supreme Court on Monday when it ruled that states can count mail-in ballots that arrive after Election Day as long as they are postmarked by then or election officials determine that the ballots were cast on time.
from Politics, Policy, Political News Top Stories https://ift.tt/4yjlT7x
https://ift.tt/nW8RgaU
0 Comments